the best digital technology.,..I`m planning on taking a photography course, and need a digital SLR to get me started. I want one that has at least 10m pixels, but apart from that I really have no idea what I`m looking for.. I`ve read so many reviews online about all the MANY different cameras out there, and I`m afraid it`s just confused me more!

I wonder if you can please advise me on a matter that's doing my brain in!

I have the Nikon D40, a great Speedlight and lenses include the 18-55 and the awesome 18-200. However, here's the question? I am considering changing my body for the D60, purely as I have been advised that updated software is used and the overall results are improved. Saying this, I can shoot 1,000 photos a month, or none the next and I hardy ever print anything out, choosing to view on an excellent screen, so is it really worth spending the money for a new body?

I have two big trips coming up, so if I'm going to change, I'll do it now, but in your opinion, as I am truly delighted with my D40, is it just a waste?

Let's get back to your original question. The next lens you should buy is either the 35mm 1.8 or the 50mm 1.8. Both are fast and relatively inexpensive, and are reputed to give excellent results. They won't autofocus on your D40, though, but it's easy to do so yourself.

I think you made a wise choice for yourself; I've been considering it myself. If these are indicative of the quality, I don't think you'll be disappointed. I have heard that lens creep can develope after using it a while (when pointed straight up or down, the lens will slowly creep out of position).

I think you made a wise choice for yourself; I've been considering it myself. If these are indicative of the quality, I don't think you'll be disappointed. I have heard that lens creep can develope after using it a while (when pointed straight up or down, the lens will slowly creep out of position).

Chris

Thanks Chris, yes I am very pleased with the lens... oh and the results... read about lens creap also but I think the photos speak for themselves.... A good all round lens I think....

On (full-frame) 35mm cameras, "portrait" lenses have traditionally been between about 75mm and about 105mm, as these produced the most flattering facial proportions.

With the D40 and other cameras using the APS-C (or in Nikon's terminology, "DX") sensor-size, a 50mm lens makes an excellent portrait lens because it produces proportions roughly equivalent to those produced by a 75mm lens used on a full-frame sensor.

The old Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 lens is easy to find for around US$120, and though it requires manual focus on a D40, will yield good portrait results with pleasantly out-of-focus backgrounds (bokeh) when used with a wide aperture.

Nikon and Sigma have recently released 50mm f/1.4 lenses that contain AF motors (and so will autofocus on the D40). Most reviews say both of these lenses are excellent, and although they run about US$450-$500 new, they're an f-stop faster than the old f/1.8, and apparently significantly optically superior to the old Nikkor 50mm f/1.4.

The 18-200mm lens is a handy all-purpose lens -- great for travel, especially. But it does tend to produce soft images (i.e., they sometimes seem to be a bit blurry), and its widest aperture is f/3.5, which does not allow the best bokeh. In portraits, you'll get better results with this lens if you keep it between 50mm and 70mm. Also, someone mentioned lens creep: my copy of this lens did indeed start to exhibit lens creep about 4 months after purchase; that's mostly just an annoyance, but on hikes it can expose the lens to damage if you're not careful.